A 5-Year Review of Clinical Outcome Measures Published in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association and the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery ®

Hasenstein, Todd; Greene, Timothy; Meyr, Andrew J.

doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2017.01.023

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The outcome after the surgical treatment of CAI is heterogeneously evaluated using several different modalities, from objective parameters, like the assessment of ankle laxity, to numerous clinical outcome measurement scales (COMs), both clinician and patient reported [10, 11]. The preoperative evaluation of patients with CAI is also not uniform, with varying combinations of patient history, symptoms and imaging evaluations used to establish the diagnosis leading to the surgical indication [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation modalities for the anatomical repair of chronic ankle instability

Spennacchio

Meyer

Karlsson

et al. 2019

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Several evaluation modalities are reported in the literature dealing with the operative treatment of chronic ankle instability (CAI) both to establish the CAI diagnosis leading to the surgical indication and to assess the effectiveness of ankle stabilisation procedure. The purpose of this study is to present an overview of the pre-and postoperative evaluation modalities reported in the literature dealing with CAI operative treatment. The comprehensive analysis of the different modalities chosen by researchers is expected to suggest critical points in current evaluation ability of CAI surgical treatment. Methods Systematic review of the literature on surgical treatment of CAI through anatomic procedures. Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane electronic databases were analysed, from 2004 to 2018. Results One-hundred-and-four studies met inclusion in this systematic review. 88 out of 104 studies analysed preoperative mechanical laxity of the ankle to depict the ligamentous insufficiency related to the subjective feeling of functional instability. Stress radiographs and manual stress examination of the ankle were the two most common modalities to evaluate joint laxity, reported in 67 and 53 studies, respectively. Clinical Outcome Measurement Scales (COMs) is the most common evaluation modality (102 out of 104 studies) to assess CAI surgical outcome. The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot scale (AOFAS) and the Karlsson score are the most frequent COMs, reported in the 66% and 33%, respectively of the included literature. The radiographic analysis of ankle laxity after stabilisation procedures is the second most frequent postoperative evaluation modality, reported in 55 out 104 studies. Conclusions There is a lack of standardization among researchers related to both the criteria to establish the CAI diagnosis leading to the surgical indication and the modality chosen to evaluate the effectiveness of surgical treatment. Future standardization of evaluation modalities in the CAI population is desirable to increase consistency of reported data. Level of evidence Level IV, review of level I, II, III and IV studies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation modalities for the anatomical repair of chronic ankle instability

Spennacchio

Meyer

Karlsson

et al. 2019

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2011, AOFAS published a position statement indicating that their clinical rating system was not considered valid or reliable, advising against its continued use. ( 19 However, a study conducted in 2017 by Hasenstein et al ( 20 found AOFAS to be the clinical outcome assessment tool most used by authors and published in medical journals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which Clinical Outcome Scores Are More Frequently Used in the Literature on Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus? A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed to identify the most used scales in the assessment of the clinical outcomes for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE databases from September 1999 to September 2019, based on the guidelines established by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The research strategy was: osteochondral [All Fields], AND (“talus” [MeSH Terms] OR “talus” [All Fields]) AND lesion [All Fields]. Of the 364 articles found in the literature, 166 (45%) were included in the study and 198 (55%) excluded. In total, 23 clinical assessment tools were used in the studies. Results: We found 49.4% of the studies to use the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scale (AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale) and 29.5% the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Conclusion: The use of AOFAS increased in relation to VAS in the last 6 years (p = 0.046), and these two scales, either alone or combined, were the most used for studying osteochondral lesions of the talus. Level of Evidence III, Systematic Review of Level II studies.

show abstract

“…During the follow-up period, anterioposterior and lateral X-rays were taken to observe the status of the fracture healing. During the final follow up, functional outcomes were assessed with the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score [17].…”

Section: Outcomes Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the efficacy of posterior-anterior screws, anterior-posterior screws and a posterior-anterior plate in the fixation of posterior malleolar fractures with a fragment size of ≥ 15 and < 15%

Wang

Sun

Jiang

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Different fixation methods have been used to treat posterior malleolar fractures (PMFs), but the clinical efficacy of different fixation methods in the treatment of PMF with different fragmentation has rarely been reported. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of posterior-anterior (PA), anterior-posterior (AP) screws and PA plate in the fixation of PMFs with a fragment size of ≥15 and < 15%. Methods: This is a retrospective study of the clinical data of 243 patients with a unilateral ankle fracture involving the posterior malleolar ankle fracture. All patients were divided into two groups based on their fragment size, ≥15% (n = 136) and < 15% (n = 107). After reduction of PMF under direct vision via a posterolateral approach, posterioranterior (PA), anterior-posterior (AP) screws and PA plate were used for fixation of PMF in the two groups. Briefly, for fixation of PMF with PA screw, two to three 3.5-mm (Depuy Synthes, Switzerland) cannulated screws were placed from the posterior to anterior direction; for fixation with PA plate, a 3.5-mm reconstruction plate (Depuy Synthes, Switzerland) was placed from the posterior to anterior direction, and for fixation of PMF with an AP screw, two to three 3.5-mm screws were placed from the anterior to posterior direction. All patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery and thereafter at 6-month intervals. The primary outcomes were AOFAS and ROM, which were recorded at the final follow-up.

show abstract

A 5-Year Review of Clinical Outcome Measures Published in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association and the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery ®

Cited by 11 publications

References 14 publications

Evaluation modalities for the anatomical repair of chronic ankle instability

Evaluation modalities for the anatomical repair of chronic ankle instability

Which Clinical Outcome Scores Are More Frequently Used in the Literature on Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus? A Systematic Review

Comparison of the efficacy of posterior-anterior screws, anterior-posterior screws and a posterior-anterior plate in the fixation of posterior malleolar fractures with a fragment size of ≥ 15 and < 15%

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About